Christine Perriott sues for reinstatement of B.T.L. job
The case of Christine Perriott versus Belize Telecommunications Limited got underway this morning in the courtroom of Justice John Muria. But before they tackled the substantive issues of Perriott’s reinstatement and compensation for her alleged losses, her attorney Lois Young is in the meantime asking the court to force B.T.L. to give Perriott her job back as a grade six technician in the Internet Department. Young argued that the letter of termination her client received gave no reason why she was fired. Young also took issue with an affidavit filed by B.T.L. attorney Andrew Marshalleck, which she says is a “broad brush attempt,” by C.E.O. Dean Boyce, “at throwing mud at Christine Perriott” and is filled with inaccuracies and hearsay. In that document, Boyce alleged that he was told by Perriott’s Manager Jose Riveroll that her contribution to the department was limited, that she failed to submit reports, her attitude was often negative, and that employees felt threatened by her. Boyce also said that the relationship between the company and Perriott had broken down and that her continued employment was becoming detrimental to the interests of the company. The affidavit went on to say that for some time Perriott was personally not happy working with the company and that she had made statements in and out of the company and in the media that demonstrated her beliefs. In listing reasons why she should not be reinstated, Boyce said that it would not be practical, that the day after her termination another employee was promoted to her post, there would be no work for her to do, and that everybody was working more freely without the obstructions that Perriott was causing. Young argued that there was no rift between her client and her co-workers and that if Perriott was unhappy she could have resigned. She contended that if Perriott was such a bad employee why did the company give her almost twelve thousand dollars in ex-gratia payments?
When it was his turn to speak, Marshalleck pointed out that the court has no power to grant a reinstatement order at this stage of the proceedings, saying that the power to reinstate is predicated on the findings and that there can be no findings without the benefit of a full trial. He claimed that since Perriott was given her full entitlements that she is better off financially by not being reinstated, since if she got her job back now she would have to give back the money she received. Marshalleck went on to say that there has been a total breakdown of the relationship between Perriott and B.T.L. and that B.T.L. should not be forced to rehire her when trust and confidence has broken down. Justice Muria will consider the arguments and present his ruling on the request Thursday.
In related news, the arbitration process for the three other fired B.T.L. employees remains stalled as the union say they are still awaiting the terms of reference. According to the N.T.U.C.B., they have written to the Prime Minister expressing their dissatisfaction with the process.
